Does Canon deserve a third try?

Guest

I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?

Advertisements

In article <>, says...
> I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?

Maybe you are out of luck. I've been using Olympus digital cameras since
1997 and never experienced failures. The C2000 which I bought in 1999 is
now being used by my brother in the Central African republic (he's a
missionary there).
--

Advertisements

<> wrote in message
news:...
>I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?

I have the somewhat typical love-hate relationship with Canon. My 20D is a
superb camera but has a serious flaw. It locks up.

I have a Oly E20 and it is about 3 years old and works all the time. I would
like to get a newer camera but am afraid I will not be able to find a work
horse like the one I have. Good luck in your search. Let us know what you
end up doing.
<> wrote in message
news:...
>I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?
>

wrote:
> I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?

No no no. It does not deserve a third try. And I'm not surprised by
your experience, at all.

Canon is mostly a marketting-led corporation that makes a huge profit
on your purchase (the reputation of its professional gear is used to
sell the low quality junk that is its consumer line). Canon also
expects you to upgrade frequently, and hence too it cares little that
it cameras last at all. It's time that you buy something made by decent
engineering-led makers like Olympus or Fuji that give you your money's
worth in quality, and experience true ruggedness in a consumer camera.

<> wrote in message
news:...
>I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?
>
I've never been impressed with Canon's compact camera offerings. Their SLR
and lens lineup are first rate.
John

My E-10 is still going strong. I would like more megapixels but this beast
just keeps on working. I am a photojournalist and it gets a real workout.

"RON" <> wrote in message
news:...
> I have a Oly E20 and it is about 3 years old and works all the time. I
would
> like to get a newer camera but am afraid I will not be able to find a work
> horse like the one I have. Good luck in your search. Let us know what you
> end up doing.
> <> wrote in message
> news:...
> >I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> > Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> > G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> > While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> > try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?
> >
>
>

<> wrote in message
news:...
>I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?

Perhaps a better question:

Does your treatment/handling of gear have anything to do with why your
cameras don't last?

In article <>, wrote:
> I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?

It's a strong camera but, like any DSLR, it won't tolerate dirt entering
the optical area. Change lenses with a bunch of kids and dogs running
around and it won't work for long. Durability also depends a lot on
which lens you put on it.

Midsize point'n'shoot cameras like the Oly C-series are probably the
most rugged. They're not great performers but they'll handle dirt and
drops well.

"Stacey" <> wrote in message
news:...
> wrote:
>
>
>> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
>> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?
>
> Rugged isn't a word that comes to mind holding a Rebel XT.
>
> --
>
> Stacey

On Thu, 30 Jun 2005 10:21:08 GMT, "Pete D" <> wrote:
>
>"Stacey" <> wrote in message
>news:...
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
>>> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?
>>
>> Rugged isn't a word that comes to mind holding a Rebel XT.
>>
>> --
>>
>> Stacey
>
>Have to agree with you here, they are really awful.
>
You've had reliability problems with a DRebel XT?
Or is this just a "feeling" you get from handling one for a minute or
so?
Why does "heavy" equate to "sturdy" in cameras? Why is weight decried,
if it means the camera will withstand more bumps?
I don't understand.

Of course, I don't understand why people think light cars are safe
compared to SUVs, either.

Try picking up a Rebel 2000 sometime. That really is quite awful,
and yet I've been using one since not long after they came out,
without any problems at all. I think people who find the XT
flimsy haven't had enough experience of -real- cheaply-built
cameras.

In article <>,
"Vince_Ecosse" <> wrote:
> `Durability also depends a lot on
> which lens you put on it.`
>
> Kevin,
> Could you please say more about the quoted sentence. I do not see how
> the lens you put would affect the camera reliability and hence life
> span?
> Thanks

I mean durability of the whole system, not the camera itself. It's easy
for one lens to cost more than your camera. Ultra-high range zooms are
pretty bad about sucking dust into themselves. A polarizer, UV filter,
hood, or even an empty ring can avoid most damage to the lens from bumps.

wrote:
> I had an S20 that was great, but after two years it stopped snapping.
> Canon said it would cost more to fix than to replace. I upgraded to a
> G3, and was very happy until 2.5 years later the screen crapped out.
> While I'm ready to upgrade to a DSLR anyway, does Canon deserve a third
> try (Rebel XT) or is there a more rugged brand?
>

Consider yourself lucky. The screen on my G3 died after only 1.5
years. It happened a few weeks ago, and it would have cost $195 to fix.
I'm not having it fixed.

Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> In article <>,
> "Vince_Ecosse" <> wrote:
>
>> `Durability also depends a lot on
>> which lens you put on it.`
>>
>> Kevin,
>> Could you please say more about the quoted sentence. I do not see
>> how
>> the lens you put would affect the camera reliability and hence life
>> span?
>> Thanks
>
> I mean durability of the whole system, not the camera itself. It's
> easy for one lens to cost more than your camera. Ultra-high range
> zooms are pretty bad about sucking dust into themselves. A
> polarizer, UV filter, hood, or even an empty ring can avoid most
> damage to the lens from bumps.

There is the effect of heavy versus light lenses on the mount. Kind of
a physics thing about lever arms and all. I don't know of any specific
instances of lenses jerking the interface out of a camera body, but I
remember being warned about it in the olden days. Maybe materials and
technology have advanced to the place where it is no longer a concern,
but just looking at some combinations of components makes me uneasy,
torsionally speaking.

In article <>,
"Frank ess" <> wrote:
> Kevin McMurtrie wrote:
> > In article <>,
> > "Vince_Ecosse" <> wrote:
> >
> >> `Durability also depends a lot on
> >> which lens you put on it.`
> >>
> >> Kevin,
> >> Could you please say more about the quoted sentence. I do not see
> >> how
> >> the lens you put would affect the camera reliability and hence life
> >> span?
> >> Thanks
> >
> > I mean durability of the whole system, not the camera itself. It's
> > easy for one lens to cost more than your camera. Ultra-high range
> > zooms are pretty bad about sucking dust into themselves. A
> > polarizer, UV filter, hood, or even an empty ring can avoid most
> > damage to the lens from bumps.
>
> There is the effect of heavy versus light lenses on the mount. Kind of
> a physics thing about lever arms and all. I don't know of any specific
> instances of lenses jerking the interface out of a camera body, but I
> remember being warned about it in the olden days. Maybe materials and
> technology have advanced to the place where it is no longer a concern,
> but just looking at some combinations of components makes me uneasy,
> torsionally speaking.

I suppose you could damage the mount if you pulled hard enough to break
the four bolts. You'd need really strong fingers.

A more common problem with big lenses is that bumps and drops hit a lot
harder. They can also topple your tripod in windy weather. Of course
if you drop your camera with a gigantic Canon L-series lens on it,
you'll be crying about the loss of the lens, not the camera. I keep the
camera strap wrapped around my hand all the time; even with a tripod.
It has saved me _lots_ of money.

"Bill Funk" <> wrote in message
news:...
> You've had reliability problems with a DRebel XT?
> Or is this just a "feeling" you get from handling one for a minute or
> so?
> Why does "heavy" equate to "sturdy" in cameras? Why is weight decried,
> if it means the camera will withstand more bumps?
> I don't understand.
>
> Of course, I don't understand why people think light cars are safe
> compared to SUVs, either.
>

I don't feel safe in my car with so many people that don't know how to drive
their SUVs.

Share This Page

Welcome to Velocity Reviews!

Welcome to the Velocity Reviews, the place to come for the latest tech news and reviews.

Please join our friendly community by clicking the button below - it only takes a few seconds and is totally free. You'll be able to chat with other enthusiasts and get tech help from other members.
Sign up now!